The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Elliot

By Russell Kirk

REVIEW BY GREG SCHALLER President of the John Jay Institute

Russell Kirk’s The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Elliot is an essential part of modern conservative political thought. Completed 65 years ago, Kirk’s book is devoted to recognizing the common thread that unites conservative thought. His survey begins with Edmund Burke and continues to mid-20th century thinkers.

What is conservatism and what are those who claim the label of conservative actually seeking to conserve?

These questions are as important today as they were nearly seven decades ago, when Kirk began an exploration into the concerns which culminated in his dissertation and ultimately his important work: The Conservative Mind

Today, much like in the 1950s, many argue there is little, if any, consistent thread that binds the various strands of ‘conservatism’ together.

Modern conservatism can be broken down into several predominant ideologies: traditional conservatism, libertarianism, religious conservatism, neoconservatism, and a hybrid American conservatism. Those attuned to the modern debate amongst these groups can rightly ask whether or not there is a tie that binds them together.

For Kirk, developing a cogent theory of conservatism was important in the wake of the rising influence of modern liberal political theory, which had transformed political thought from the time of the Enlightenment. In his mind, modern political theorists had made a radical, and incorrect, departure from traditional philosophy in four key ways:

• Meliorism: a belief in human progress and ultimately the perfectibility of man

• Contempt for tradition and formal religion, both being hindrances to progress

• Political levelling: order and privilege are condemned in favor of total democracy

• Economic levelling: a push for radical redistribution of property and wealth.

In order to confront this pivot, Kirk thought it essential to answer the questions about what conservatism actually is. First, if we seek a return to a conservative order, we ought to “know the tradition which is attached to it.” Second, even if a conservative order cannot be restored, we should be familiar with conservative ideas “so that we may rake from the ashes what scorched fragments of civilization escape the conflagration of unchecked will and appetite.”

Russell Kirk

Kirk believed that to understand America, a study of Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, and London form the bedrock for development of the traditions and customs that culminated in the American founding.

– Greg Schaller

Kirk was greatly influenced by the 18th century Catholic political writer Orestes Brownson, whose influential book The American Republic (1866) developed a theory about societies holding two constitutions, one written and one unwritten.

The written constitution is the law ordained by the nation or people instituting and organizing the government; the unwritten constitution is the real or actual constitution of the people consisting of the long-standing traditions, mores, and customs.

Kirk draws extensively from Brownson by arguing that constitutions rely heavily on historical experience and are the product of gradual development. To understand America properly, this contextual development is essential.

Indeed, Kirk was so convinced of the superiority of this unwritten constitution over the written that he wrote that “no matter how admirable a constitution may look upon paper, it will be ineffectual unless

the unwritten constitution, the web of custom and convention, affirms an enduring moral order of obligation and personal responsibility.”

Kirk believed that to understand America, a study of Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, and London form the bedrock for development of the traditions and customs that culminated in the American founding. It was these traditions that were under attack and in need of restoration and protection.

For Kirk, the culmination of these cultural and political traditions are the essence of conservatism. He narrows down the key components into six essential ‘canons.’ These are:

• A belief that a divine intent rules society as well as individual conscience, “forging an eternal chain of right and duty.” Within this framework, political problems are, at their root, religious and moral.

• An affection for traditional life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most modern theorists.

• The belief that civilized society requires orders and hierarchy. The only true equality is moral equality; all other attempts at leveling lead to misery and state-sanctioned tyranny.

• The understanding that property and freedom are inseparably connected. Modern attempts at economic leveling are not economic progress. When we separate property from private possession, liberty is lost.

• Man must put a control upon his will and his appetite. Man is too often governed by emotion more than by reason. Because of this, adherence to tradition provides a sound check upon man’s impulses.

• Societies will inevitably alter, but Providence is the proper instrument for change.

When Kirk began his exploration of the nature of conservatism in the 1950s, most academics concluded that there was little tying these groups together, instead believing that they were mostly disparate thinkers, largely writing in isolation from one another.

Up to that point, scholarship largely concluded that writers and thinkers like Burke, John Adams, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Alexis de Tocqueville, Brownson, and T. S. Eliot were operating in isolation from each other. However, Kirk believed that they were, in fact, joined in their inclination “for the old and tried against the new and untried.”

It took Kirk four years of research and writing to connect the dots of the seemingly disparate thinkers and writers, concluding that the consistency in their thought rested in their agreement on the importance of these six canons. The Conservative Mind demonstrates convincingly that there had been

a significant conservative tradition in America since the founding of the republic.

A frequent theme throughout much of Kirk’s writing is an emphasis on the “permanent things.” For Kirk, these are the enduring truths of human existence, which directs both the order of the soul and the order of the people. There are, he wrote, “certain permanent things in society: the health of the family, inherited political institutions that ensure a measure of order and justice and freedom, a life of diversity and independence, a life marked by widespread possession of private property. These permanent things guarantee against arbitrary interference by the state.” Absent the maintenance of the permanent things, Kirk feared that we were nothing more than “the beasts that perish.”

Kirk did not despair of our current political and cultural climate. In fact, he possessed a degree of restrained optimism for America. He believed that the United States possessed the fundamentals that might make possible a restoration of the “permanent things.” America has “the best written constitution in the world, the safest division of powers, the widest diffusion of property, the strongest sense of common interest, the most prosperous economy, an elevated intellectual and moral tradition, and a spirit of selfreliance unequalled in modern times.”

REVIEWER BIO

GREG SCHALLER

Greg Schaller is the president of the John Jay Institute, a post-baccalaureate fellowship program based in the suburbs of Philadelphia, devoted to the cultivation of principled Christian leaders. Prior to joining the John Jay Institute, Schaller taught Politics at Colorado Christian University.